General History Of Dogs

There is no misconception that in the very early days of human habitation he made friends with some kind of native representative of our modern dog, and that this was his help in protecting him from wild beasts, and in guarding his sheep and goats, giving him his share of food, corn in his habitat . Perhaps the animal was originally nothing more than an unusually gentle wolf, or a sick wolf driven by its companions from a wild booty in search of shelter in unknown places. One can only imagine that the partnership may have started in the context in which some helpless lambs were brought home by early hunters to be cared for and raised by women and children. Dogs housed as toys for children will grow up to be picked up, and taken away, as family members

Indigenous dog trails are found in almost every part of the world, with the only exception being the West Indian Islands, Madagascar, the eastern islands of the Malayan Archipelago, New Zealand, and the Polynesian Islands, where no dog, wolf, or fox is present as an animal real natives. In the ancient lands of the Orient, and often among the early Mongols, the dog remained a nuisance and neglected for centuries, walking in pockets, barking and looking like a wolf, as it walks today on the streets and under the walls of all Eastern cities. No effort is made to draw people into relationships or to develop them into a dynamic one. Until we will examine the records of the superior civilizations of Assyria and Egypt where we find any different types of canine form.

The dog was not much appreciated in Palestine, and in both the Old and New Testaments the most talked about contempt and contempt "as an unclean beast." Even the most common reference to the Sheep in the Book of Job "But now they that are younger than I have me in derision, whose fathers I would have disdained to have set with the dogs of my flock." "So they both went out, with the young man's dog."

The variety of dog breeds and the wide variety of breeds, scores, and general appearance of facts make it hard to believe that they could have the same breed. One thinks of the differences between Mastiff and Japan Spaniel, the Deerhound and the fashionable Pomeranian, St. Bernard and Miniature Black and Tan Terrier, and it is confusing when they think about the possibility of descending from common ancestors. There is, however, no greater difference between the Shire horse and the Shetland horse, the Northorn and Kerry cattle, or the Patagonian and Pygmy; and all dog breeders know how easy it is to breed species with a learned choice.

To better understand this question it is necessary to first look at what the plot is in battle with the dog. This structural identity can be better researched compared to the invisible system, or the bones, of two animals, which are so closely alike that their mutations would not be readily available.

The dog's spine has seven vertebrae in the neck, thirteen in the back, seven in the waist, three sacral vertebrae, and twenty to twenty-two in the tail. In both the dog and the wolf there are thirteen ribs, nine are true and four are false. Each has forty-two teeth. Both have five front and four toes, and on the outside a typical wolf has the appearance of a large, boneless dog, that a popular description of one might work for another.

And their habits are different. The wolf's natural voice is a loud howl, but when confined with dogs it will learn to bark. Although he eats meat, he will also eat vegetables, and when he is sick he spreads grass. In expulsion, a pack of wolves will split into groups, one following in the footsteps of the herd, another trying to curb its retreat, using a multi-pronged strategy, which is characteristic of many of our game dogs and hunting grounds.

Another important point of similarity between Canis lupus and Canis familiaris lies in the fact that the gestation period in both species is sixty-three days. There are from three to nine lambs in wolf litter, and these do not see for twenty-one days. They are weaned for two months, but at the end of this time they can eat half the minced meat removed from their dam or their alarm system.

Indigenous dogs of all regions are close in size, color, form, and habit to the indigenous wolf of those regions. In this very important case there are too many situations to allow its being regarded as coincidental. Sir John Richardson, writing in 1829, noted that “the resemblance between the North American wolf and the Indian dog is so great that the size and strength of the wolf seems to be the only difference.

It has been suggested that one irrefutable argument against lupine's relationship with the dog is the fact that all domestic dogs bark, while all wild Canidae express their feelings only in tears. But the difficulty here is not as great as it seems, for we know that foxes, wild dogs, and foxes that are raised by puppies easily find the practice. Domestic dogs, on the other hand, are allowed to run wild and forget how they bark, while others have not yet learned to speak for themselves.The presence or absence of the barking practice will therefore not be considered an argument in the decision-making process for the dog question. This stumbling block disappears, leaving us in a position to agree with Darwin, who was eventually thought to be the most likely dog ​​of the earth to have evolved from two excellent wolf species (C. Lupus and C. Latrans), as well as two or three more endangered European species, namely European, Indian, and Northern forms. Africa; from at least one or two species of canine in South America; several breeds or species of foxes; and perhaps from one or more extinct species ”; and that the blood of this, sometimes mixed, flows into the veins of our domestic species.